EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Templars are trained to fight exactly these kinds of situations. It is entirely plausible that a Templar would have been able to resist the Sloth Demon's magic entirely.
Akka le Vil wrote...
A knife is a weapon, but it's not comparable to a nuke.AlexXIV wrote...
Sorry but according to you everyone who has any power must be locked away. People are not equal in power. Some may do martial arts, some may have a gun, some have political power, some are rich. The only difference is that mages are born with the talent, without having a choice.Come back talking about it when some abomination raze your village and slaughter all the people you've known.I will never tolerate any statement that tries to justify oppression of people because they are different or potentially dangerous.
It's easy to talk the talk. But if abominations and blood magic really existed, the real criminal would be the one not protecting others from them. You don't sacrifice countless people just because it makes you look good saying "it's not nice to lock away some people !".That's not ridiculous at all. From the point of view of other species, it actually make A LOT OF SENSE.I don't know if you even realize that your way to argue would also mean all humans (from the view of other species on our planet) should be controlled by some alien race because they are a threat to all life on earth. And that they can't control themselves because they need an independ faction to guard them. That's kind of ridiculous.
And you would agree if it was about very advanced aliens using US as cattle. I can guarantee you that you would see positively some other entity restraining them.
You're just very narrow-sighted.
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Alistair didn't complete his training, nor does he have any experience as an actual Templar. The Templars who lost their lives within the tower was, as now mentioned several times, taken by surprise and was completely unprepared for an abomination attack of that magnitude.
I am narrow sighted because I think trying to get along with each other
is better than imprisoning or killing each other? Mages do have an
interest in not becoming abominations, or being possessed. So why is it
unthinkable that the mages control themselves? It's not like mages are
naturally worse people than templars. And I didn't see where the Chantry
succeeds in keeping demons from taking over people. In contrary, they
even provoke mages to use blood magic. If you helped the Circle mages
you met a couple who only sided with Uldred because they were sick of
being treated like criminals even before they did anything. Is it
not natural that if someone treats you like you did something bad you
start thing oh well if they treat me like a bad guy anyway I can aswell
act like it? There is a reason why people are considered innocent
until proven otherwise. It is called justice.
Modifié par Jalem001, 14 septembre 2010 - 03:26 .
They also kill the random abominations which happen to occur once in awhile in the tower, they however weren't prepared for that many. And just exactly why on the surface of the earth should they ever even want to go all rambo-style and hunt an appostate mano-a-mano? Safety in numbers. Bring the convict in, instead of giving him a fair chance of escaping.AlexXIV wrote...
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Alistair didn't complete his training, nor does he have any experience as an actual Templar. The Templars who lost their lives within the tower was, as now mentioned several times, taken by surprise and was completely unprepared for an abomination attack of that magnitude.
How could they be prepared if all they really do is killing apprentice mages when they fail the Harrowing or hunt single apostates in large groups. It's not like you could become some sort of hero by being a coward.
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
But they aren't innocent. They are guilty of being able to do magic. Yes it is not their own choice and yes that is indeed very tragic, but the threat is simply too great to just "let them" take care of it themselves.
Just how are they treated like animals? They are given food, shelter and most importantly education so they can use their power for good. All that is asked in return is that they confine themselves to the tower, unless given a task outside of it. If you think the mages of Ferelden is being treated like animals look at the Qunari mages.
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
True. I can aggree that some Templars have shown to be a bit over-zealous. However if the Templars allowed themselves to befriend the mages they may one day find themselves lacking the will needed to do what must be done. Though I also need to point out that all the stories of oppression comes from mages and mages alone, I think there are more than a little bias hidden somewhere in their complaints.
The Chantry teaches that the Maker is gone from the world, so the chance of him cleansing the heathens is pretty slim.svendigo wrote...
Psh, all you heathens shall be cleansed in the name of the Maker!
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
But they aren't innocent. They are guilty of being able to do magic. Yes it is not their own choice and yes that is indeed very tragic, but the threat is simply too great to just "let them" take care of it themselves.
Just how are they treated like animals? They are given food, shelter and most importantly education so they can use their power for good. All that is asked in return is that they confine themselves to the tower, unless given a task outside of it. If you think the mages of Ferelden is being treated like animals look at the Qunari mages.
Everwarden wrote...
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
But they aren't innocent. They are guilty of being able to do magic. Yes it is not their own choice and yes that is indeed very tragic, but the threat is simply too great to just "let them" take care of it themselves.
Just how are they treated like animals? They are given food, shelter and most importantly education so they can use their power for good. All that is asked in return is that they confine themselves to the tower, unless given a task outside of it. If you think the mages of Ferelden is being treated like animals look at the Qunari mages.
They have their children taken away and aren't allowed to be in relationships. Said this before, but it bears repeating.
This alone is enough reason for the mages to revolt.
No, you're narrow-sighter because you only talk about the mage PoV, and completely lack to take into account the consequences of your ideas.AlexXIV wrote...
I am narrow sighted because I think trying to get along with each other is better than imprisoning or killing each other?
As I said before, that's the beauty of the settings : Bioware found an extremely interesting situation where the solution that is used make complete sense (protecting people from the collateral damages that can stem from mages - blood magic and abomination), while being partially unjust at the same time (many mages that would neither touch (or at least abuse) blood magic nor be overwhelmed by demons, are restricted in their freedom).Mages do have an interest in not becoming abominations, or being possessed. So why is it unthinkable that the mages control themselves? It's not like mages are naturally worse people than templars. And I didn't see where the Chantry succeeds in keeping demons from taking over people. In contrary, they even provoke mages to use blood magic. If you helped the Circle mages you met a couple who only sided with Uldred because they were sick of being treated like criminals even before they did anything. Is it not natural that if someone treats you like you did something bad you start thing oh well if they treat me like a bad guy anyway I can aswell act like it? There is a reason why people are considered innocent until proven otherwise. It is called justice.
I usually don't even play mages, mostly warrior or rogue, but if a
full scale war errupted between mages and Chantry because the mages
don't want to be treated like animals or tools for Chantry needs
anymore, then I'd 100% side with the mages, yes even as non mage.
Actually, that's exactly what the Chantry is doing, trying to find a solution so everyone can be happy.If magic exists it is part of the creation, like every other thing that exists. So I would rather try to understand and find solutions so everyone can be happy than compromising my beliefs out of fear.
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
ImoenBaby wrote...
That was unintentionally ironic.
You know, when you used your dismissive "teenage rebels" remark, you derailed your entire argument: there was an actual "teenage rebel" who was run through by the Templars in DA:O. You know, Wynne's student.
He fled because he was suddenly alienated from home life, and had trouble coping. Not because he was a blood mage, or an abomination, or because, hey - if the Templars decide you're a threat, you're dead.
He was hunted by a gang from the armed wing of the Chantry, and run through with a sword...because he was a frightened elf child in a world controlled by strange humans.
No, it's definitely not shallow and simplistic to describe the Chantry as a tyranny. It is a factual description of reality under Chantry rule, at least for those who - gasp! the immaturity! - want freedom to live free of persecution. It's by no means the Chantry's only characteristic, but it is a defining one for apostates, and I bet anyone else who disagrees with the religious powers that be.
But yes. There are always those who will think it's generous to not kill mages, just blanket oppress them regardless of their individual motivations and histories. Oh, the princely generosity. Paragons of beneficience.
What's that you say? But mages are potentially dangerous? So are males. A disproportionately large group commits the most violent crime, and the most serious. They are potentially and factually responsible for most violent disruptions of civil order. IN FACT, SO IS ANYONE, with enough numbers or power.
And what's that? Mages are historically responsible for the Dark City? According to the Chantry, you mean?
Let's assume the Chantry's correct: how does it follow that all mages, everywhere, at all times, should always be oppressed/supervised/whatever you want to call it? Should all Germans be on a leash after WW2? Oh, wait, they can't be dominated by demons. I forgot that part. They can only be swayed by a charismatic leader and their own prejudices.They can only command an arsenal of world-destroying weaponry.
EPIC FAIL.
I don't even know where to begin. You single out one instance of a mage being cut down? So what. When someone has a loaded gun, you wil lshoot to protect yourself, regardless if he's scared or not. **** happens. Wynne herself thinks templars are needed and has no hatered for hte Chantry. What does that tell you.
You say opression, I say bull****. The mages have it good considering they are walking nukes. You're even against supervision as I see. Your attitude is simply illogical. Under your rule, Thedas would fall apart in a few days.
And no, you cannot compare males to mages. Do I really have to go an exaplin exactly why such comparison is flawed on so many levels?
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
jpdipity wrote...
On the other hand, the rigid, lock-them-away, remove all personal freedoms, forcibily remove the infant child of a mage after birth, strip mages of their identity and history all in the name of keeping the rest of society safe is beyond extreme and causes more harm than good in my opinion.
Furthermore, it is absolutely repugnant to imprison an entire group of people based on possessing a set of attributes that they were born with and cannot change. I will not support an organization who regularly commits abhorent acts simply because they donate large sums of money to good causes and operate under the guise that they are protecting society from potential crimes that may or may not ever happen.
I'm willing to bet anything you wantt that if mages and abominations were real, you'd be singing a different tune. Sometimes, discrimination is simply warranted... Like, let's say some people have the plague..and you don't posses the cure. Will you give them a brotherly hug or will you drive them away from the cities?
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Mages have it better than most people in Thedas. Free education, food, clean clothes, roof over their heads, protection...But it's never enough, is it?
Sir JK wrote...
Like some others, I think the idea of the opressive chantry is a bit exaggerated. Yes, the organisation have done some very cruel things, but they also do a lot of good. Furthermore, more or less the entire theodosian society rests on the pillars of the chantry. Crush the chantry and you crush society and civilisation (and replacing it will take centuries).
Sir JK wrote...
The most common argument for the evils of the religion is that it opresses the mages, locks them away in a tower with no liberties, no hope and no real life.
However... a mage is in the tower free to explore and develop his/her powers (with a few no-go areas). They recieve free food, drink, roof over their head, warm beds and protection by what probably is the world's most well funded armed force. They recieve free training in both civilian and military use of their powers and are given access to all the lyrium they need (need I point out that refined lyrium is insanely expensive?). They are also largely protected from being forcefully dragged into politics.
That's not too shabby... it's better than most regular people have it, even some nobles.
Sir JK wrote...
I'll also point out that Gregoir, knight-commander of the Fereldan circle, redirects you to Irving when it comes to requesting aid/resources from the circle. If the Templars/chantry control everything the mages do, why would the leader of the circle Templars defer his judgement to the senior enchanter. The simplest reason would be that the Templars cannot actually order the mages, they may veto some decisions perhaps but to me it seemed like it is in fact the mages of the circle that gets to decide what they will do, not the templars (also, the mages choose the first enchanter from the senior enchanters). I think this is further reinforced by the fact that Gregoir and Irving both have to decide to tranquilize Jowan. Something the mages and templars agree on together.
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
True. I can aggree that some Templars have shown to be a bit over-zealous. However if the Templars allowed themselves to befriend the mages they may one day find themselves lacking the will needed to do what must be done. Though I also need to point out that all the stories of oppression comes from mages and mages alone, I think there are more than a little bias hidden somewhere in their complaints.
Akka le Vil wrote...
Actually, that's exactly what the Chantry is doing, trying to find a solution so everyone can be happy.If magic exists it is part of the creation, like every other thing that exists. So I would rather try to understand and find solutions so everyone can be happy than compromising my beliefs out of fear.
It would be much simpler for them to just kill anyone showing the gift of magic. Instead of this, they spend ENORMOUS amount of ressources to supply Magic Circles and Templars in order to allow mages to live and non-mage not to be subject to random slaughter. The point of Circles of Magic isn't to OPPRESS mages ; the point of Circles of Magic is to KEEP THEM ALIVE.
Based on what? Testimony of the accusator? The only reason you feel anyhting for the mages, is because some mage has complained about being treated unfairly. A complaint he might have exagerated to any degree. And yes of course the Chantry underplays their oppression of the mages too.AlexXIV wrote...
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
True. I can aggree that some Templars have shown to be a bit over-zealous. However if the Templars allowed themselves to befriend the mages they may one day find themselves lacking the will needed to do what must be done. Though I also need to point out that all the stories of oppression comes from mages and mages alone, I think there are more than a little bias hidden somewhere in their complaints.
So if you complain about being treated unfair you are biased and therefore nobody should listen to you. Also that's simply not true. Not just mages think that it is a no go how they are treated. You won't believe it but I am not a mage irl and I still find it wrong, as do the majority of people I'd say.
The mages are allowed to have all the friendships they want, just not romantic connections, which still happen (Wynne's adventure for instance), and no of course they can't raise their own children as that would lead to an attachment from the childs side and possibly to another Redcliffe incident. Its a heavy price a mage pays with no fault of his own, but he has to.Everwarden wrote...
They have their children taken away and aren't allowed to be in relationships. Said this before, but it bears repeating.
This alone is enough reason for the mages to revolt.
1. They are forbidden to have children. It is as simple as that. She broke that rule and needs to be punished. This particular Knight-Commander seems in favor of capital punishment. She should have thought about that before she went and got herself pregnant.RazorrX wrote...
To throw this in:
There is a new Dragon Age Comic book that is written by Orson Scott Card. So far it has dealt with Mages and Templars.
1. Mages are forbidden to have children. When a mage turns up pregnant the Templar Commander strikes her, Makes a comment about telling the circle that two of their kind have been breeding, and later makes a statement that if he could she would be executed for it.
2. When she flees rather than have her child taken from her the templars are sent with this order “There is no capture for the witch, only death. This phylactery filled with her blood will lead you to her. When you find her, kill her at once, or you are no templar.”
3. Later when templars are heading out to ‘capture’ another apostate (a girl who is not a blood mage). They are joking about torturing and killing the ones they find rather than bring them to the tower.
People believe that mages monitoring themselves would lead to a situation where the most powerful mages (generally the blood mages, according to David Gaider), would make the rules, and decide who gets monitored for what, leading to the situation that exists in the Imperium. How would you get around that, if Ferelden mages monitored themselves?fantasypisces wrote...
I believe a tower "of-sorts" needs to exist for the express purpose of training mages: how to control their powers, the morale responsibility, etc. However, I do not believe that the tower should be dominated and controlled by the chantry (i.e. templars). A majority of references you find about people becoming blood mages and such is in regards to helping them escape the chantry.
Some a few pages back mentioned something along the lines of being "all for mage freedom until an abomination destroys your village, then you will change your tune." My opinion? That's no different then a band of mercenaries or robbers or psychos or what have you also sacking the village. Yet the former is "LOCK THEM UP!" while the latter is "oh, that's too bad"?
The threat of abominations is real, but I bet very very few mages would actually allow themselves to become possessed. Look at Morrigan, a women who constantly proclaims that power is all that matters, even she refuses to be dominated or controlled (the fade quest, she goes in the fade to save conor, anvil of the void).
So simply, I believe a school of magic is necessary, but after you are deemed to be fit enough to carry the burden of magic you can go off on your own, or choose to stay at the tower. You would probably be surprised at how many would simply choose to stay in the safe environment, especially since there is no templar control.
Templar's would still exist, and be tasked with hunting down abominations, but that would be more of a police force task rather than as full-time jailers.
Modifié par errant_knight, 14 septembre 2010 - 05:31 .
No, they are oppressive. That's why the mages keep trying to emancipate
themselves from them. If they weren't oppressive, Uldred and the mages
wouldn't have sided with Loghain for freedom from the Chantry.
Yes,
it's easy to type a few words into a computer and state that people
living under the oppression of a regime that teaches people to hate you
and gives you no rights to own lands, to raise children, to go outside...
Irving
makes it clear that he can't do anything to help Jowan during Magi
Origin despite being the First Enchanter. I'm guessing that you might
want to come up with a better example.
Modifié par Sir JK, 14 septembre 2010 - 05:55 .
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
.
The mages are allowed to have all the friendships they want, just not romantic connections, which still happen (Wynne's adventure for instance), and no of course they can't raise their own children as that would lead to an attachment from the childs side and possibly to another Redcliffe incident. Its a heavy price a mage pays with no fault of his own, but he has to.1. They are forbidden to have children. It is as simple as that. She broke that rule and needs to be punished. This particular Knight-Commander seems in favor of capital punishment. She should have thought about that before she went and got herself pregnant.RazorrX wrote...
To throw this in:
There is a new Dragon Age Comic book that is written by Orson Scott Card. So far it has dealt with Mages and Templars.
1. Mages are forbidden to have children. When a mage turns up pregnant the Templar Commander strikes her, Makes a comment about telling the circle that two of their kind have been breeding, and later makes a statement that if he could she would be executed for it.
2. When she flees rather than have her child taken from her the templars are sent with this order “There is no capture for the witch, only death. This phylactery filled with her blood will lead you to her. When you find her, kill her at once, or you are no templar.”
3. Later when templars are heading out to ‘capture’ another apostate (a girl who is not a blood mage). They are joking about torturing and killing the ones they find rather than bring them to the tower.
2. She flees. This is the second time she breaks a fundemental rule of the Circle. That and she plans on harboring an appostate (her child) and possibly teach blood magic to stay alive. Too dangerous to leave alive. She should have thought about that before she ran away.
3. As I've mentioned some Templars are over-zealous. But some Templars are kind of heart too. This particular appostate drew the short straw in the game of fate, and had sadistic brutal templars sent after her. Too bad.
This might come across as cynical, and it is, but this is just the way things work.
Retour en haut